Shaik parole: DA writes to Health Professions Council
The Democratic Alliance (DA) will write to the Health Professions Council of South Africa (HPCSA) requesting that they investigate the serious anomalies associated with the granting of medical parole to Schabir Shaik. This follows reports in a Sunday newspaper that Professor DP Naidoo, Head of Cardiology at the hospital where Mr Shaik was treated, personally discharged Shaik in November - but that the Department of Correctional Services blocked Shaik's return to prison.
The HPCSA is a statutory body that has the power to institute enquiries into any complaint, charge or allegation of unprofessional conduct against South African health professionals registered in terms of the HPCSA's governing legislation. We will be submitting our concerns to the HPCSA on the basis that all the evidence available to the public indicates that Schabir Shaik is not in the final phase of a terminal disease, as is required of medical parole applicants by section 79 of the Correctional Services Act.
On 12 August 2008, the matter of medical parole was discussed at length by the Portfolio Committee on Correctional Services. At that meeting the process of identifying a patient as in the final phase of a terminal disease was outlined as follows:
- A registered nurse initiates the process by submitting a detailed report and recommendations to the medical practitioner regarding the offender's medical condition. Alternatively, the medical practitioner may initiate the process.
- The medical practitioner assesses the offender's condition and completes a G337 form (Medical Status Report of Offender), along with a specialist's report and any other relevant medical reports.
- A medical practitioner then must indicate "if the illness is terminal and also whether the offender is in the final phase" with respect to life expectancy.
In other words, the onus is on the medical practitioner to judge whether an offender can be classified as being in the final phase of a terminal condition - as is stipulated in the Correctional Services Act. At present, the evidence available to the public suggests that Mr Shaik is suffering from an illness, but is not in the final phase of a terminal illness. This inevitably raises serious questions about the procedure followed by the medical practitioners. In addition, it should be noted that:
- The Portfolio Committee on Correctional Services was informed on August 12th that Shaik was ill, but was not suffering from a terminal illness.
- Newspaper reports this week have quoted medical staff at the hospital where Shaik was being treated as saying that they were never under the impression that Shaik was terminal, and that he had not even been following a specific diet. Indeed, he was allegedly consuming fast food. Furthermore, a report in today's Sunday Times quotes the hospital's head of cardiology as saying that Shaik was considered well enough to leave hospital four months ago, and was officially discharged. This, he says, was blocked by the Department of Correctional Services.
- Some reports have indicated that Shaik is suffering from a very rare form of drug-resistant hypertension. This condition is not believed to be lethal in itself.
- As has been widely discussed in the media, Minister Ngconde Balfour has stated that "one [of the three doctors] even went as far as saying that his condition has reached an irreversible condition". The only possible way of interpreting this is that two of the three doctors did not believe that the situation was irreversible. Thus, under the terms of the Correctional Services Act, it would have been wholly incorrect to recommend Shaik's release on medical parole.
Given that all of the available evidence suggests the Mr Shaik is not in final phase of a terminal disease, but that the three medical practitioners treating him have found otherwise, we believe that the HPCSA can and must conduct an inquiry that will ensure that professional medical standards are being upheld. Notably, this inquiry will be able to determine whether any irregularities occurred, without necessarily publishing confidential information pertaining to Shaik's medical condition.